Dr. Abdel Monem Said Aly | Brandeis University (original) (raw)

Papers by Dr. Abdel Monem Said Aly

Mediterranean Politics, Mar 1, 2000

Food insecurity concerns are as old as humanity. Food security exists when all population, at all... more Food insecurity concerns are as old as humanity. Food security exists when all population, at all times, has access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food. It is built on four pillars, namely food availability, food access, food utilisation, and stability. While it is widely admitted that food security increases with economic development, also rich countries in the Near East and North Africa (NENA) region, such as the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries, face specific challenges. Therefore, this review paper analyses the state, determinants and perspectives of food security in GCC region. Historically, food security was not an issue for the GCC states. In fact, GCC states are capital rich and have no foreign exchange limitation for food import. Consequently, due to their robust fiscal position resulting in high buying power, these countries, have been less vulnerable to price risk than other food importers; and able to bridge the shortfall in domestic production. As a result, in 2018, the six GCC members have been ranked as the most food secure in the Arab world and among the most food secure countries in the world. However, in the wake of the 2007-2008 global food crisis, food security became an ongoing challenge. The crisis exposed the high dependence of GCC countries on imports, limits of import-based food policies and the need to increase the local production. However, agriculture is limited by several natural conditions, such as scarce water resources and poor soils, and aquifers have been heavily exploited above the average natural recharge. Further, potentially, more critical to GCC food security is availability risk, which arises when an import-dependent country is not able to obtain food, even if it has sufficient funds to purchase it. The paper makes the case for promoting a productive and sustainable agriculture, with high resources use efficiency, to increase food security in the GCC.

International Spectator, Oct 1, 1996

... Iraq's Scud-B missiles hit Israel's population centers and in spite of the minimum ... more ... Iraq's Scud-B missiles hit Israel's population centers and in spite of the minimum damage they incurred, the prospects of another war in ... On the contrary, it will produce more poverty, unemployment, marginalization and foreign domination and will engender greater contradic ...

Security Dialogue, Mar 1, 1994

The sixth Arab-Israeli war, which began on July 12, 2006, and ended 34 days later, left behind a ... more The sixth Arab-Israeli war, which began on July 12, 2006, and ended 34 days later, left behind a fragile situation guided by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 and guarded by a multinational force. As usual, the war was associated with risks of a much broader confrontation. It also created opportunities, however, for a peaceful breakthrough in a conflict that has eluded resolution for over half a century. The timing of the war, in political and strategic regional terms, and its theater-Lebanon-have yielded their own distinct characteristics. Most Middle East wars in the post-September 11 era have not been concluded; the violent confrontations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, and the Palestinian territories are all cases in point. These conflicts continue festering like open wounds, with no realistic hopes of quick resolution. The recent war between Hezbollah and Israel has added another round to the agonies of the Arab-Israeli conflict, ending with a fragile situation along the Israeli-Lebanese border. The war also launched another wave of instability inside Lebanon, bringing with it new tensions among the country's political and confessional groups. And the general confrontation between the West and Islamic fundamentalism has deepened to include a new theater of operations. I. Three Wars in One The sixth Arab-Israeli war defined a new pattern of warfare in the Middle East, in which the military confrontation represented not only the warring partiesin this case, Israel and Hezbollah-but, rather, three levels of confrontation encompassed in a single theater of operations. In the first of these, the war

Middle East Policy, Jun 1, 2001

Political and Strategic Studies What amazes me about the U.S.-Egyptian relationship is the large ... more Political and Strategic Studies What amazes me about the U.S.-Egyptian relationship is the large discrepancy between what leaders say and the perception of the relationship by the elites. Whenever President Mubarak comes to the United States or a prominent American official visits Egypt, you'll find the relationship described as "close," as "strategic," as "friendly." Sometimes even the word "alliance" is used. However, when you go down from the top leaders, you'll find a lot of apprehension about this relationship. It looks like a bad marriage that's about to collapse, although it's endured for more than 27 years, or like a couple who met in a train and will depart sometime soon. That's the logic that's reflected in Egypt when people talk about U.S. hegemony, for instance, about U.S. double standards, about the fact that the real intention of the United States is to curb Egypt's regional role. We find the same things in the United States, but in different language. There are doubts about Egypt's role, about its sincerity towards the peace process. There is even doubt about Egypt's ability to grow or to be a country that really can benefit from American help. If we look closely at the history of this relationship, the leaders' opinion is vindicated. There were some basic changes that took place in Egyptian-American relations following Kissinger's famous trip to the Middle East in November of 1973. Egypt and the West came to agreement on four major strategic objectives. The first was to achieve peace in the Middle East. The second was to achieve security in the Gulf. The third was to work toward the stability of the Middle East. The fourth was the development of Egypt as a cornerstone of all these objectives. Despite everything we hear today about peace in the Middle East going through a rough period, a mental change has taken place in the Middle East: a conflict that was basically existential has turned into a conflict about how we are going to live with each other. We are talking now about streets, alleys and percentages, not about the reality of the Israeli existence in the Middle East or the reality and the existence of the Palestinians

During the controversy over the review of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1995, the Egyptia... more During the controversy over the review of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1995, the Egyptian position was distinguished not only by sharp opposition to the unlimited extension of the treaty, but also by calling on the international community to pressure Israel to sign the NPT and to put its nuclear installations under the customary international safeguards. More often than not, the Egyptian position was portrayed in the Western media, particularly in the United States, as an expression of an Egyptian fear of a decline in Egypt's regional role. It was argued that as the Palestinians, the Jordanians, and other Arabs made peace with Israel, Egypt would lose its mo nopoly over peacemaking with Israel. In most cases, Egyptian threat percep tions of the Israeli nuclear capabilities were ignored. The purpose of this ar ticle is to fill that gap and to argue that the Egyptian position is in fact embed ded in the national security threat perceptions of Egypt.

Building Global Security Through Cooperation, 1990

For much of the post-1945 era, arms transfers have been a crucial part of the major powers’ relat... more For much of the post-1945 era, arms transfers have been a crucial part of the major powers’ relations with the Third World. Although these powers have tried to establish close ties with the developing countries through a variety of non-military methods — including economic assistance, trade, educational exchanges, and political cooperation — arms transfers have remained the major instrument in building and changing regional alliances. Thus, in spite of the centrality of East-West relations in world politics, the Third World has been the field where indirect confrontation has taken place. Of course, regional factors, historical as well as geopolitical, have played their part in leading to the great powers being called upon for help. However, Third World conflicts presented an opportunity for the major powers, and especially the superpowers, to intervene directly and indirectly in these conflicts. In the last four decades certain patterns for arms transfers have emerged.

Minority Report: A View from the Middle East "Middle East After Arab Spring" , 2015

The following report represents a minority of one in the MEST Security Working Group. The author ... more The following report represents a minority of one in the MEST Security Working Group. The author has attended only one meeting of the group in person, and few others when audio/visual capability was available to connect from Cairo to Washington. Unfortunately, it was not always the case. In these occasions, the author represented his views hoping to reflect how today’s Middle East is viewed in the minds of Middle Easterners. . In no given time he claimed that his views are reflecting neither a consensus nor a majority of views in the region. Yet, the subject is much more than being an academic endeavor; or policy exercise, for people from the Middle East; it is a life and death situation. It is quite literally the future of children and grand children.

The International Spectator, 1996

Mediterranean Politics, Mar 1, 2000

International Spectator, Oct 1, 1996

Security Dialogue, Mar 1, 1994

Middle East Policy, Jun 1, 2001

Building Global Security Through Cooperation, 1990

Minority Report: A View from the Middle East "Middle East After Arab Spring" , 2015

The International Spectator, 1996

Bertlsmann Foundation Publishers, 1996

Classic theory of collective security has emphasized the notion that war prevention among states ... more Classic theory of collective security has emphasized the notion that war prevention among states could be achieved by implementing the principle that a war against one nation is a war against all nations. After World War I. the League of Nations created a system of collective security that rested on the collective prevention and punishment of aggression. The charter of the United Nations after World War II followed equal traditions. However. the persistence of wars and conflicts in the international and regional systems has made the classic theory a myth more than a reality. In fact, in many cases alliances that were based on the theory tended to prolong conflicts because of their overemphasis on power politics and military preparedness that usually ended in escalating the arms race and tensions. where the classic theory of collective security was originally fashioned. have changed the theory fundamentally from being military oriented to being based on extensive political and economic cooperation.

Brookings Institute Press, 1997

For decades. the Arabs and Israelis fought each other to affirm their national identitie... more For decades. the Arabs and Israelis fought each other to affirm their national identities, territories, and natural resources. For the Israelis, the fight was for a self-recognized sense of nationhood that would gather all the Jews of the world in the holy land of Palestine. For the Arabs, the fight was to rectify the "original sin" of uprooting the Palestinians from their historical homeland and depriving them of their right to self-determination. The conflict between the two sides continued without abatement in international fora and on battlefields for over a half century. Six wars (in 1948, 1956. 1967. 1969-70, 1973, and 1982) made attempts to resolve the conflict futile. Even when Egypt and Israel, under American sponsorship, signed the 1979 peace treaty. the likelihood of resolving the Palestinian question and achieving peace between the Arab states and Israel defied conclusion. Instead, the two parties remained in a deadly arms race, mobilizing resources and continuously preparing for another, more devastating war. Over time. the conflict extended to a host of increasingly complicated issues, such as the Arab territories occupied in June 1967. the arms races, water supplies, refugees and the economic boycott.

Center for Asian Studies, Cairo University, 1996

Geography as well as history has defined to a large extent the national security problems of Egyp... more Geography as well as history has defined to a large extent the national security problems of Egypt and its regional reach. Situated at the southeast comer of the Mediterranean Sea, at the crossroads of the three continents of the old world, and at the end point of the River Nile's long journey from the heart of Africa, Egyptian security and regional role have become sensitive to the moves and capabilities of external powers. The long history of Egypt defined the "fronts" which the Egyptians have had to defend: from the north, over the Mediterranean, came the Greeks, Romans, Crusaders, and later the French and British colonizing forces; from the northeast, over the African Asian land bridge, the Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Byzantines, Arab, Turks and finally Israelis, marched towards the Nile Valley. From the south, since Egypt's very existence depends on the water of the Nile, the first consideration for any Egyptian government is guaranteeing that these waters are not threatened. This legacy molded the fears of the Egyptian polity.

Islamic Fundamentalism is different in many ways from both Fascism and Communism. At the end both... more Islamic Fundamentalism is different in many ways from both Fascism and Communism. At the end both of the latter were a product of Western Civilizations. Islamic Fundamentalism is not. Both were products of advanced industrial societies in the north, IF is a product of less developed countries in the South. Both deal with the present day, IF deals with the present day and the day after. Both believed in building states that are powerful to challenge the status quo world dominance. Both found in Russia, Germany, Japan and Italy bastions for expansion, IF found in the global Islamic Umma its opportunity. Both were a byproduct of the industrial age, IF is the by product of the global age.

Friendly Reforms vis Hostile Reforms: In Search of Reforming the Middle East, 2015

Now, Egypt has entered a new phase in its foreign policies and the protection of its national sec... more Now, Egypt has entered a new phase in its foreign policies and the protection of its national security, starting with the fact that internal construction and building the elements of strength is the cornerstone of protecting Egypt and achieving its strategic goals in mobilizing the external environment to support the Egyptian interior.
If there is any lesson to be drawn from the USA experience in the Middle East, it will be the limits of any power's ability to change fundamentally other countries even if that power is super and the only super power in the world. Transformation of states is a historical process where there is no one approach that can fit all particularly in the highly diversified Middle East.